OMG it's a tier list

[Interceptor]

Would you want to waste the time retyping [...]

I don't know about him, but I wouldn't want to make two separate, unrelated placement arguments in the same post, which is exactly what that is.

Is there anyone else in the thread that wants to whiff the point, here? At this rate, we might hit double-digits.

[dondon151]

OK, so let me get to the points then:

1. No objections to Titania (N) > Mia (N).

So let's make the change and move on to the next point:

2. Objections to Titania (T) > Mia (T)?

[WeaponsofMassConstruction]

I want to first establish that Mia(T) isn't a tier above Mia(N) in short because her offense and defense and proc and avoid dependent, respectively, which means the extra strength/BEXP ability mean less. In comparison, you might consider how Gatrie and Shinon's transfer versions are immobile since even though they get cool stat boosts or more BEXP potential, the tools they need to be effective aren't impacted by the transfers.

[Narga_Rocks]

Titania can ORKO Thunder Spirits at 2-range.

Sure, if they aren't on any +def tiles.

Neither Mia nor Titania can actually ORKO any important spirits with 2 range weapons (without Parity, anyway). Mia can, however, ORKO both Thunder and Wind even if they are on +10 def tiles (with support + 1 range weapon, though technically a +atk support would give her 52 atk with Alondite and allow her to but that's irrelevant). Not like that part matters if they are on +15 def tiles (the type near Seph).

The game is not '2RKOing vs 3RKOing'. It is 'does Titania deal enough damage that we can reasonably expect to finish him with another character'. Unless that you're suggesting that the freedom to use a non royal non trueblade non laguz character to weaken Sephiran is somehow significant.

And yet you don't see how the one that does more damage has an advantage over the one that does less?

And besides, what advantages exactly does IkexMia give the team? I can't really say that it's going to make or break Ike whether he gets his +1 or 2 mt. It's not like Ike needs Mia tagging along behind him.

No, he just needs someone tagging along that doesn't screw over your offence because the enemies keep going after some nub. How many partners manage to match what part 4 Mia does with Tempest?

Of course it does. When you make a change like Titania > Mia, you are saying that Titania's set of advantages (higher strength, movement, axes) are superior to Mia's set of advantages (higher speed). Obviously, you can't apply the exact same argument to Oscar vs Mia because Oscar is not the same as Titania (he has lower strength and lances instead of axes), but the tier list should be coherent as to what advantages are more valuable than others.

Except for the possibility that the improvement Mia gets from her transfer is superior to the improvement Titania gets + the amount of the win of Titania(N) over Mia(N). If you read the math I gave you at all you'd understand this obvious concept and at least make a half-assed attempt (because I can't expect a proper one from you) to disprove the notion.

I guess that having actually played this game with transfers, I'm probably not the best person to talk about this.

And yet you must never have used Mia(T) otherwise you wouldn't be delusional about her improvement. Try ORKOing without procs from 3-5 on (though still missing some halbs and obviously generals).

It's a shame that the best solution that anyone could think of to put transfers on the tier list was to pretend that they don't exist.

And you've come up with a way to get around

well, titania(T) gives you an extra speedwing that you can stick on Boyd(T), but what if Boyd(T) isn't also getting transferred? oh, but sometimes he is, so we should account for that. And hey, Oscar(T) looks nice, but what if Titania(T), Ike(T) and Mia(T) are all on his team and his improvement is virtually meaningless?

blah blah blah

Trust me, in a void is so very much better.

But how much does Mia even need that def/luck? I was under the impression that a support with Ike was really all she needed to be durable. The only thing I really care about there is earlier promotion, which will only have an effect in Part 4.

I like lck for less crit-chance. 3HKOd at <20% hit rates is the cool part about the Ike support, but facing crit can ruin her day. The quicker her luck goes up the quicker I no longer have to care about that with part 4 snipers or whatever other enemy may pull 3 or 4 % crit.

I can't really see her ever digging herself out of 3HKOing.

I like your (lack of) evidence. Have you ever even tried? As soon as spd caps (at base, btw) she's looking at str being her 3rd highest growth. She can generally start bexping str immediately. And she already starts with 19 str. 4 str should take maybe 5 or 6 levels. Compare Mia(N)'s str at level 13.

Why would she even need the wing in Chapter 3-2? She doubles all the Paladins and alls the General and all the Sages. The only thing she doesn't double is like, the boss and a few Swordmasters she wouldn't double even with the Wing (and a single speed proc even lets her double the boss).

Well now you are stuck. So yeah, Titania's improvement is that you get an extra wing (yippee) and she does better in 3-P and 3-1. That's it.

And sure, Mia has 2 more strength. (fix: probably 3 or 4 more by 3-2) Does this matter? How big of a difference does this make? Say she has 20 (21 or 22) strength, or 32 (36 or 37 with a steel sword forge and a C support) attack with a Steel Blade. She 3HKOes Paladins in 3-2. So she's gone from a 3HKO to a 3HKO, except that now she has 1% more crit and 1% more adept chance and 2 more avoid.

Let's see. First off, steel blades are 13 mt, not 12. Second off, 14 mt steel sword forge is a possibility. She should also probably have 21 str, but maybe 22. Yes, even in 3-2. 21 + 14 + 1 = 36. She now ORKOs all but 2 paladins. And that's only 3-2. And she goes from borderline 4HKOing (5HKOing many) Generals to nearly 3HKOing. So both making it easier for others to KO if she doesn't proc something and making it easier to kill if she does. A crit will kill now, guaranteed. And even without the support. Heck, she goes from 4HKOing dracos to 3HKOing without wyrmslayer, so now that adept % applies to them as well and Ike can use the wyrmslayer. Or whatever.

At least run numbers properly taking into account all possibilities.

Unless there's something I'm missing here (a lot), Mia gets very little a lot out of her transfers. I am still mystified why she is in Top Tier above Volug and Sothe because I never stop to think about things properly.

Better?

Edited December 7, 2010 by Narga_Rocks

[Anouleth]

Sure, if they aren't on any +def tiles.

Neither Mia nor Titania can actually ORKO any important spirits with 2 range weapons (without Parity, anyway). Mia can, however, ORKO both Thunder and Wind even if they are on +10 def tiles (with support + 1 range weapon, though technically a +atk support would give her 52 atk with Alondite and allow her to but that's irrelevant). Not like that part matters if they are on +15 def tiles (the type near Seph).

True.

And yet you don't see how the one that does more damage has an advantage over the one that does less?

I said 'significant'. Obviously, dealing more damage is better, but dealing 10 or 12 more damage against a single boss in the whole of 4-E-4 does not strike me as significant.

Note that I never claimed that Titania was better than Mia for Endgame. Just that the gap between them is not large (superior 4-E-1 against superior 4-E-4 and 4-E-5). 4-E is not very important in any case. I managed to deploy supposedly awful scrubs like Renning and Marcia and Tanith last time I played through it and still managed 3/1/1/1/2 turns, because it's just that easy.

No, he just needs someone tagging along that doesn't screw over your offence because the enemies keep going after some nub. How many partners manage to match what part 4 Mia does with Tempest?

Titania, for a start, since we are talking about IkexTitania.

Except for the possibility that the improvement Mia gets from her transfer is superior to the improvement Titania gets + the amount of the win of Titania(N) over Mia(N). If you read the math I gave you at all you'd understand this obvious concept and at least make a half-assed attempt (because I can't expect a proper one from you) to disprove the notion.

Since my initial assumption was that the improvement that Titania gets is greater than the improvement than Mia gets

And yet you must never have used Mia(T) otherwise you wouldn't be delusional about her improvement. Try ORKOing without procs from 3-5 on (though still missing some halbs and obviously generals).

Chances are she will only ORKO the weaker Paladins in 3-5, but true, I didn't notice that.

And you've come up with a way to get around

well, titania(T) gives you an extra speedwing that you can stick on Boyd(T), but what if Boyd(T) isn't also getting transferred? oh, but sometimes he is, so we should account for that. And hey, Oscar(T) looks nice, but what if Titania(T), Ike(T) and Mia(T) are all on his team and his improvement is virtually meaningless?

blah blah blah

Trust me, in a void is so very much better.

Why, because it's easier? Why not remove Herons from the tier list as well since they're a pain to tier?

Yes, you will have to account for many different possibilities when you tier transfer characters. But you have to do the same for any character. When we tier Nolan, we have to consider what happens if we're fielding Aran, or Jill, or even Edward. Even if it would be easier to throw up our hands in the air and declare that Aran and Edward are never going to be seriously used, we don't do that.

I like lck for less crit-chance. 3HKOd at <20% hit rates is the cool part about the Ike support, but facing crit can ruin her day. The quicker her luck goes up the quicker I no longer have to care about that with part 4 snipers or whatever other enemy may pull 3 or 4 % crit.

So it's Speedwing versus ~2 luck?

I like your (lack of) evidence. Have you ever even tried? As soon as spd caps (at base, btw) she's looking at str being her 3rd highest growth. She can generally start bexping str immediately. And she already starts with 19 str. 4 str should take maybe 5 or 6 levels. Compare Mia(N)'s str at level 13.

Ok.

Well now you are stuck. So yeah, Titania's improvement is that you get an extra wing (yippee) and she does better in 3-P and 3-1. That's it.

Well, she can also BEXP better in Tier 2 after strength and skill cap so she can be more certain of capping speed, since if she misses it she won't double as much in Part 4.

Let's see. First off, steel blades are 13 mt, not 12. Second off, 14 mt steel sword forge is a possibility. She should also probably have 21 str, but maybe 22. Yes, even in 3-2. 21 + 14 + 1 = 36. She now ORKOs all but 2 paladins. And that's only 3-2. And she goes from borderline 4HKOing (5HKOing many) Generals to nearly 3HKOing. So both making it easier for others to KO if she doesn't proc something and making it easier to kill if she does. A crit will kill now, guaranteed. And even without the support. Heck, she goes from 4HKOing dracos to 3HKOing without wyrmslayer, so now that adept % applies to them as well and Ike can use the wyrmslayer. Or whatever.

I find it hard to believe that Mia is going to gain four levels in just two chapters. And really, so what? She ORKOes Paladins if she's lucky, which is what Titania does naturally, except with 9 move instead of 7. And seriously, 3HKOing Generals? Don't make me laugh. 3-5 Generals have 40HP and 25DEF. Mia would need a Steel forge with capped strength and an A Rank support to 3HKO. She is not going to have all of that by 3-5, especially if you pair her with Ike. And Generals only get tougher as Part 3, so it will eventually be impossible for her without a Crown.

At least run numbers properly taking into account all possibilities.

You're right, I should have checked Steel Blade's attack power.

Better?

You're right, actually. I didn't really appreciate that Mia could eventually break into 2HKOing in Part 3 with transfers... but I still think that Mia (T) should go down.

[Narga_Rocks]

Since my initial assumption was that the improvement that Titania gets is greater than the improvement than Mia gets

Proof by assumption then? Brilliant.

Why, because it's easier? Why not remove Herons from the tier list as well since they're a pain to tier?

Herons are actually possible to tier. These aren't.

Yes, you will have to account for many different possibilities when you tier transfer characters. But you have to do the same for any character. When we tier Nolan, we have to consider what happens if we're fielding Aran, or Jill, or even Edward. Even if it would be easier to throw up our hands in the air and declare that Aran and Edward are never going to be seriously used, we don't do that.

Not really. We don't really care too much about fielding Aran or Jill or Edward when tiering Nolan, actually. When was the last time you saw someone talking about that when looking at Nolan? We generally just assume the team is as good as possible in order to thrust Nolan into his most unfavourable reasonable situation (where the rest of the team is all fairly good and he's not like your best guy since you are running around with Ed and Aran and Meg and Fiona).

You really can't do that with transfer units. Also there is no point. Many transfer units would now not even move. If Oscar is, say, xth best on the team, and after everyone gets transfers he's still xth best on the team (at least much of the time) then what motivation is there to put him above, say, Laura?

Besides, the way we do it now you get a great picture of how much it improves them over normal. This is because their competition is the same (Mia(N)'s competition is identical to Mia(T)'s competition), so where they get placed illustrates how much of an improvement the transfer is (which is, after all, what we are trying to show). This wouldn't be true if you had a bunch of random and unpredictable other transfer units join the team.

I find it hard to believe that Mia is going to gain four levels in just two chapters.

Oh god. Are you even trying to pay attention? She needs bexp in 3-P to finish her level and bexp in 3-1 to finish her level. Bam. 21 str. A lot of the time anyway. We aren't sure precisely how bexp works, but she's certainly going to have either 20 or 21 and is probably more likely to have 21. Why the hell did you think I bothered to point out that str was now her third highest growth? Trivia?????

(oh, and if she happens to have 20, perhaps the coin you stick on her forge just happens to have +1 mt. It's enough that you are probably looking at her being much more likely to have 36 atk than 35)

And really, so what? She ORKOes Paladins if she's lucky, which is what Titania does naturally, except with 9 move instead of 7. And seriously, 3HKOing Generals? Don't make me laugh. 3-5 Generals have 40HP and 25DEF.

Nope. You definitely aren't trying to pay attention. First, I said "nearly 3HKOing". Check their stats in 3-2, genius. 38 hp and 24 def (some have less though and she actually does 3HKO). 36 atk does 36 damage in three hits to 24 def. 2 hp away from a 3HKO. I don't know about you, but to me that says "nearly 3HKOing". How do you define the word "nearly"? Hmm?

The important thing here is that instead of having 18 + 14 + 1 = 33 atk and just barely missing the 4HKO (she does 36 damage in 4 hits now) she is guaranteed to pull that 4HKO and be able to kill with a crit. The "nearly 3HKO" part is just to emphasize how easy it becomes for other units to KO what she leaves weakened if she doesn't crit.

Mia would need a Steel forge with capped strength and an A Rank support to 3HKO. She is not going to have all of that by 3-5, especially if you pair her with Ike. And Generals only get tougher as Part 3, so it will eventually be impossible for her without a Crown.

And that would be oh so relevant if I was actually arguing for that. Way to pay attention.

(besides, take 3-8. Anything with <= 42 hp and 25 def gets 3HKOd by 39 atk. 23 + 14 + 2 = 39. You telling me Mia won't have an A by 3-8? And maybe I got a tiny bit lucky and maybe I got a little more exp in 3-2 than others would, but Mia(T) capped str during 3-5. Surely she can manage by 3-8.) 6 out of 14 Generals are 3HKOd. Not that I was even caring about whether she did that in part 3. And assuming you crown for 3-11, that's 42 atk with the forge, 41 with a blade. The forge gets all the Generals in 3 hits, the blade gets some of them. But Mia(N) might have capped tier 2 str by then anyway so by 3-11 it's not really a change anymore.)

Oh, one more thing. I'd assumed Interceptor would point it out since you said it to him, but I think he gave up on you. There are only 8 starting generals in 4-E-1 with just 30 def. You claimed they were in the majority. Look up your "facts" more. It's like a habit, man. Now, your point with that (Titania ORKOs the majority of 4-E-1's Generals with Urvan) is actually still true. The 50 hp 31 def Generals are still ORKOd, and they make up 12 of 30 starting generals, while the 50 hp and 30 def variety (the ones you claimed are the majority) account for only 8 of them. Of course, randomness will probably make a fair number of those 12 generals beyond the 2HKO, but oh well, right?

Oh, and you think Titania can do what Mia can in part 4? Have you checked their speeds and the speeds of Warriors? Like, ever? Trust me, Titania will hold Ike back in part 4 if you expect him to lug her around all the time just to get his own +avo. Also, even against tomahawks mia has a 5atk advantage from supports and weapons. 18 over 15, and +2 over +0. Titania's tier 2 cap is only a 3 point advantage over Mia, and she has a 15% str growth advantage. Titania will likely promote a little earlier, but not all that much earlier. Like, 3-8 to 3-11. If anything, Mia will probably have a 1 point atk advantage, 2 points over a hand axe forge. Then Titania's growth kicks in and it's a tie (still a loss for Titania with hand axe forges). Then their caps show up and Mia can have up to a 2 point lead again (over tomahawk). There's a reason that I specified 2 range, dude. Tempests are cool. Titania loses AS and Atk. And probably durability as well. Mia has more hp for most of her part 4 life. And def is going to be pretty close. And Mia will easily win avo by a fair chunk.

So in summary, Titania has less AS, less atk, less durability, and doesn't match move with Ike, and you are suggesting that Titania is an equivalent partner to Mia for Ike in 4-1 and 4-4. Go you.

Edited December 7, 2010 by Narga_Rocks

[dondon151]

I still think we are missing the big picture here.

Titania (T) gets: better 3-P, better 3-1, extra Speedwings. I think the value of the Speedwings is highly underestimated right now, because there's a lot more possibilities with it than just Boyd (T). There's:

- Oscar

- Skrimir

- Titania (part 4)

- Haar (part 4)

Titania saving the Speedwings for herself later means that she only needs to be --/20/7 on average to double every enemy in 4-4 minus SMs. Also, Haar only has 26 AS upon promotion and needs 30-31 AS for 4-3. We already have the 3-9 Speedwings for part 4 use, but having 2 Speedwings for the same purpose means that we don't have to pick and choose who to give it to.

I also listed Oscar because he's mounted and him doubling is actually kind of useful. Skrimir can also double most enemies in 4-4 with a Speedwings and doesn't require any resources outside of that.

Mia (T) gets: better performance before promotion (so mostly just part 3). Even with a 14 MT Steel Sword forge and 23 str by 3-8, she still doesn't cleanly 2HKO 41 HP, 17 def warriors without a support and she can't cleanly 2HKO 39 HP, 21 def halbs, period.

Really, does the improved performance against a couple of enemy types help her that much when she is still struggling most of the time to even see combat? Mia didn't gain flying, 2 move, or Ragnell from her transfer bonuses, and there's nothing that she has that sufficiently overcomes her movement disadvantage.

[Anouleth]

Herons are actually possible to tier. These aren't.

Why not? Obviously, it's going to be difficult with so many variables, but that doesn't make it impossible any more than it's impossible to tier characters in say, FE7 with so many possible permutations of deployment.

Not really. We don't really care too much about fielding Aran or Jill or Edward when tiering Nolan, actually. When was the last time you saw someone talking about that when looking at Nolan? We generally just assume the team is as good as possible in order to thrust Nolan into his most unfavourable reasonable situation (where the rest of the team is all fairly good and he's not like your best guy since you are running around with Ed and Aran and Meg and Fiona).

And a lot of the time, it's not relevant to a character whether other units get transfers. Take Oscar (T). It doesn't really matter whether Titania gets transfers or not. Or even Ike or Mia since Oscar is generally quite far ahead of them anyway.

You really can't do that with transfer units. Also there is no point. Many transfer units would now not even move. If Oscar is, say, xth best on the team, and after everyone gets transfers he's still xth best on the team (at least much of the time) then what motivation is there to put him above, say, Laura?

If Oscar (T) is the xth best person on the team before and after transfers, of course he can still move. Just because Oscar (T) is worse than Titania (T) does not make Oscar (T) worse than Titania (N).

Besides, the way we do it now you get a great picture of how much it improves them over normal. This is because their competition is the same (Mia(N)'s competition is identical to Mia(T)'s competition), so where they get placed illustrates how much of an improvement the transfer is (which is, after all, what we are trying to show). This wouldn't be true if you had a bunch of random and unpredictable other transfer units join the team.

The current tier list does not accurately show how some characters are improved either. For example, Boyd (T) is significantly better than Boyd (N) since he's now a viable Speedwing canditate and can thus dig himself out of his speed hole. He actually has comparable offensive stats to Gatrie with the obvious advantages of not having 6 move and not having an awful speed cap.

Oh god. Are you even trying to pay attention? She needs bexp in 3-P to finish her level and bexp in 3-1 to finish her level. Bam. 21 str. A lot of the time anyway. We aren't sure precisely how bexp works, but she's certainly going to have either 20 or 21 and is probably more likely to have 21. Why the hell did you think I bothered to point out that str was now her third highest growth? Trivia?????

If only strength being her third highest stat somehow guaranteed it proccing. Or she was guaranteed to be near a level-up at the end of 3-P and 3-1 without actually levelling up.

Sadly, I don't think it quite works that way. Take Tanith, for example. If BEXP was as accomodating as you make out, we could give her BEXP immediately because speed is automatically her third highest growth (with strength her second highest and defense tied with speed). But I can tell you from personal experience that 3rd highest is nowhere near guaranteed.

(oh, and if she happens to have 20, perhaps the coin you stick on her forge just happens to have +1 mt. It's enough that you are probably looking at her being much more likely to have 36 atk than 35)

There's a 34% chance, which I guess is reasonable.

Nope. You definitely aren't trying to pay attention. First, I said "nearly 3HKOing". Check their stats in 3-2, genius. 38 hp and 24 def (some have less though and she actually does 3HKO). 36 atk does 36 damage in three hits to 24 def. 2 hp away from a 3HKO. I don't know about you, but to me that says "nearly 3HKOing". How do you define the word "nearly"? Hmm?

Oh, I'm sorry, I read 3HKOing and didn't notice that you weren't actually claiming she was 3HKOing. Although you could have just said '4HKOing'.

(besides, take 3-8. Anything with <= 42 hp and 25 def gets 3HKOd by 39 atk. 23 + 14 + 2 = 39. You telling me Mia won't have an A by 3-8? And maybe I got a tiny bit lucky and maybe I got a little more exp in 3-2 than others would, but Mia(T) capped str during 3-5. Surely she can manage by 3-8.) 6 out of 14 Generals are 3HKOd. Not that I was even caring about whether she did that in part 3. And assuming you crown for 3-11, that's 42 atk with the forge, 41 with a blade. The forge gets all the Generals in 3 hits, the blade gets some of them. But Mia(N) might have capped tier 2 str by then anyway so by 3-11 it's not really a change anymore.)

Well, she needs 10 adjacents in two chapters for an extra level of support with Ike. That won't always be possible. 3-2 is over very quickly. 3-4 sees Ike be carried up to the cliffs. 3-5 is also over very quickly. She might have it, it probably depends on how fast you go. Looking at my turncounts in Part 3, I don't think it's possible unless you really glue Ike and Mia together in 3-1.

Oh, one more thing. I'd assumed Interceptor would point it out since you said it to him, but I think he gave up on you. There are only 8 starting generals in 4-E-1 with just 30 def. You claimed they were in the majority. Look up your "facts" more. It's like a habit, man. Now, your point with that (Titania ORKOs the majority of 4-E-1's Generals with Urvan) is actually still true. The 50 hp 31 def Generals are still ORKOd, and they make up 12 of 30 starting generals, while the 50 hp and 30 def variety (the ones you claimed are the majority) account for only 8 of them. Of course, randomness will probably make a fair number of those 12 generals beyond the 2HKO, but oh well, right?

Oh well. I didn't bother to mention their exact statistics, merely that Titania could 2HKO. And as I mentioned earlier, most of the 'tough' generals are sitting next to the Senators on Cover tiles and are far out of the reach of Titania or Mia.

Oh, and you think Titania can do what Mia can in part 4? Have you checked their speeds and the speeds of Warriors? Like, ever? Trust me, Titania will hold Ike back in part 4 if you expect him to lug her around all the time just to get his own +avo. Also, even against tomahawks mia has a 5atk advantage from supports and weapons. 18 over 15, and +2 over +0. Titania's tier 2 cap is only a 3 point advantage over Mia, and she has a 15% str growth advantage. Titania will likely promote a little earlier, but not all that much earlier. Like, 3-8 to 3-11. If anything, Mia will probably have a 1 point atk advantage, 2 points over a hand axe forge. Then Titania's growth kicks in and it's a tie (still a loss for Titania with hand axe forges). Then their caps show up and Mia can have up to a 2 point lead again (over tomahawk). There's a reason that I specified 2 range, dude. Tempests are cool. Titania loses AS and Atk. And probably durability as well. Mia has more hp for most of her part 4 life. And def is going to be pretty close. And Mia will easily win avo by a fair chunk.

So in summary, Titania has less AS, less atk, less durability, and doesn't match move with Ike, and you are suggesting that Titania is an equivalent partner to Mia for Ike in 4-1 and 4-4. Go you.

I don't see how not matching move is an issue. Titania at worst, needs a use of the Rescue staff in 4-4 and everywhere else is beating Mia in mobility. So there will be times where she can kill something then canto back towards Ike. Her durability is fine. Getting 4HKOed at low (below 30%) hit rates is good enough for me.

I concede that Mia is better than Titania in Part 4, in any case. I forgot how borderline Titania's speed was in 4-1.

[Narga_Rocks]

If Oscar (T) is the xth best person on the team before and after transfers, of course he can still move. Just because Oscar (T) is worse than Titania (T) does not make Oscar (T) worse than Titania (N).

Let's say you want Oscar(T) > Titania(N) (I don't agree but whatever). Oscar is still xth best on a team of transfer units. So since Laura is never in direct comparison, everything that kept Laura > Oscar(N) would still hold true for Laura > Oscar(T). Are you now going to have Laura > Titania(N)? Hardly. That's the problem. The original tier list is designed with everyone as their (N) version. If you start throwing in the idea that half the units are their (T) version, suddenly some of the other stuff doesn't work any longer since most of the DB doesn't have to care about transfers or not. The DB units would still generally be > than (T) version of a GM that they were already > the (N) version. And yet if you make a GM (T) > a GM (N) that was already > a DB unit, what do you do then?

Besides, Titania(N) is the 3rd best on the team, right? That's part of what gets her there. Oscar(T) is hardly going to be the 3rd best on the team so why should I even bother putting him above Titania(N) who was 3rd best when Oscar(T)'s like 5th or 6th best or whatever? It doesn't matter if Oscar(T) > Titania(N) (which I obviously dispute but again, whatever) because they are no longer in direct competition. If Oscar gets a transfer, why didn't Titania get one?

The current tier list does not accurately show how some characters are improved either. For example, Boyd (T) is significantly better than Boyd (N) since he's now a viable Speedwing canditate and can thus dig himself out of his speed hole. He actually has comparable offensive stats to Gatrie with the obvious advantages of not having 6 move and not having an awful speed cap.

RF tried to incorporate his speedwing potential already. Making the other GMs even better will only hurt Boyd(T)'s overall comparison anyway. Instead of improving relative to everyone, he only improves relative to units in the GMs that don't get a transfer. Which is, what, Heather and the laguz? Oh, and any units for which his transfer is a better improvement than theirs. But there are many that probably get an equal or greater improvement anyway. I'd say he should be higher on the list as the sole transfer unit than as one among many. If you disagree, then we have another issue with removing transfer units from the void. We don't even agree on how to rate them.

If only strength being her third highest stat somehow guaranteed it proccing. Or she was guaranteed to be near a level-up at the end of 3-P and 3-1 without actually levelling up.

Again, you don't read well. I never said it was guaranteed. I just said 21 is probably more likely than 20. You may notice that with all the comparisons we do with average stats, those aren't actually guaranteed either.

And like I said, she has the card from a coin to sweeten the deal. That's a base 34% chance to get 36 atk with 20 str on top of whatever chance she has to get 21 str. (and really it's a 46% chance to get a rockin' card since if she boosts her crit then that is pretty cool too on Generals once she starts 4HKOing. 19 + 14 = 33 atk so she only needs 1 point of str or her C support in order to start doing so in 3-2 on even the toughest generals.)

Oh, I'm sorry, I read 3HKOing and didn't notice that you weren't actually claiming she was 3HKOing. Although you could have just said '4HKOing'.

Not really, since that wouldn't illustrate how easy it is for others to KO what she leaves behind. 4HKOing something with 38 hp means 18 hp and 24 def if she doesn't Adept and 8 hp and 24 def if she does. 14/24 and 2/24 seem like a bigger deal than merely 4HKOing. Making others need 42 atk that early in the game is not cool. 38 is much better. The difference between 32 and 26 (if Mia adepts) is also something for the weaker characters. Like Neph or whatever. Or characters that want to use 1-2 range weapons. Say, Oscar.

Well, she needs 10 adjacents in two chapters for an extra level of support with Ike. That won't always be possible. 3-2 is over very quickly. 3-4 sees Ike be carried up to the cliffs. 3-5 is also over very quickly. She might have it, it probably depends on how fast you go. Looking at my turncounts in Part 3, I don't think it's possible unless you really glue Ike and Mia together in 3-1.

Well, 3-P is not likely going under 7 turns. I've done 7 turns and that's without rescuing Ike (read: he had a chance to build a fair amount with Mia). Then 3-1 to get them to C. Even if you take 3-2, 3-3, 3-4 combined to get Mia and Ike their B (they get 45 points from chapter bonuses alone, so don't tell me you can't scrape up 4 points in 3 chapters), 3-5 + 3-7 should make an easy A since you can't shorten 3-7 by even a single turn. Only need 19 points in 3-7 even if you got none in 3-5. 7 adjacents in a 12 turn map in which it incredibly easy to manage to get Ike to encounter the BK. Or 6 adjacents and 1 shove, if you like.

(and how did you get 10 adjacents? 10 x 3 = 30. You never need to get 30 when you only need to reach 50 or 49 and you get 15 at a time from being in the same chapter. 10 adjacents in two chapters is worth 60 points. Who needs that much? The correct number is 7, or 6 + 1 if you want to involve a turn where Ike shoves Mia for whatever reason.)

Oh well. I didn't bother to mention their exact statistics, merely that Titania could 2HKO. And as I mentioned earlier, most of the 'tough' generals are sitting next to the Senators on Cover tiles and are far out of the reach of Titania or Mia.

Buy the end of turn 1, you've got the 2 extra brave weapon guys. These have 51 hp and 31 def. That's 12 out of 32 that can't be KOd by Titania, and who knows how many of the 20 got a lucky def or hp proc and can't be killed either. Now, 8 of those guys are probably on the tiles in the two corners, but that still leaves 4 more.

I concede that Mia is better than Titania in Part 4, in any case. I forgot how borderline Titania's speed was in 4-1.

There we go. So Titania is not supporting Ike.

Edited December 8, 2010 by Narga_Rocks

[Anouleth]

Let's say you want Oscar(T) > Titania(N) (I don't agree but whatever). Oscar is still xth best on a team of transfer units. So since Laura is never in direct comparison, everything that kept Laura > Oscar(N) would still hold true for Laura > Oscar(T). Are you now going to have Laura > Titania(N)? Hardly. That's the problem. The original tier list is designed with everyone as their (N) version. If you start throwing in the idea that half the units are their (T) version, suddenly some of the other stuff doesn't work any longer since most of the DB doesn't have to care about transfers or not. The DB units would still generally be > than (T) version of a GM that they were already > the (N) version. And yet if you make a GM (T) > a GM (N) that was already > a DB unit, what do you do then?

My point isn't that transfer units should be rated relative to a team of transfer units. Only that it should be acknowledged that for a transfer unit, there will be more resources available because the rest of the team doesn't need them so badly.

Besides, Titania(N) is the 3rd best on the team, right? That's part of what gets her there. Oscar(T) is hardly going to be the 3rd best on the team so why should I even bother putting him above Titania(N) who was 3rd best when Oscar(T)'s like 5th or 6th best or whatever? It doesn't matter if Oscar(T) > Titania(N) (which I obviously dispute but again, whatever) because they are no longer in direct competition. If Oscar gets a transfer, why didn't Titania get one?

Because Titania (N), by definition, does not have a transfer. If I claim Oscar (T) > Titania (N), you cannot then claim that we can give Titania transfers because that's an different argument and not the original point.

RF tried to incorporate his speedwing potential already. Making the other GMs even better will only hurt Boyd(T)'s overall comparison anyway. Instead of improving relative to everyone, he only improves relative to units in the GMs that don't get a transfer. Which is, what, Heather and the laguz? Oh, and any units for which his transfer is a better improvement than theirs. But there are many that probably get an equal or greater improvement anyway. I'd say he should be higher on the list as the sole transfer unit than as one among many. If you disagree, then we have another issue with removing transfer units from the void. We don't even agree on how to rate them.

Perhaps the best solution is just to create an entirely separate tier list for transfer units, just as in other FEs, we have separate tier lists for different routes. Drastic, yes, but better two have two accurate tier lists then a tier list in a weird quantum state of accurate and inaccurate depending on what units are transferred.

Again, you don't read well. I never said it was guaranteed. I just said 21 is probably more likely than 20. You may notice that with all the comparisons we do with average stats, those aren't actually guaranteed either.

And how guaranteed is it? When we use average stats, we know that the numbers we throw around are likely to be the case in the real game. But the chance of Mia getting +strength from a BEXP level up could be anywhere between 45% and 100%, because we don't know how BEXP works (I think my impression is correct, but it could be wrong).

And like I said, she has the card from a coin to sweeten the deal. That's a base 34% chance to get 36 atk with 20 str on top of whatever chance she has to get 21 str. (and really it's a 46% chance to get a rockin' card since if she boosts her crit then that is pretty cool too on Generals once she starts 4HKOing. 19 + 14 = 33 atk so she only needs 1 point of str or her C support in order to start doing so in 3-2 on even the toughest generals.)

Fair enough.

Not really, since that wouldn't illustrate how easy it is for others to KO what she leaves behind. 4HKOing something with 38 hp means 18 hp and 24 def if she doesn't Adept and 8 hp and 24 def if she does. 14/24 and 2/24 seem like a bigger deal than merely 4HKOing. Making others need 42 atk that early in the game is not cool. 38 is much better. The difference between 32 and 26 (if Mia adepts) is also something for the weaker characters. Like Neph or whatever. Or characters that want to use 1-2 range weapons. Say, Oscar.

I guess, but even against Generals, most units can double. 34 attack and about 21AS is pretty realistic for a handful of units like Boyd/Brom/Rolf. I wouldn't have Oscar on the north-hand side of the map anyway. Maybe Nephenee, but she can double so she doesn't need quite so much attack. I guess it lets her avoid a counter sometimes.

Well, 3-P is not likely going under 7 turns. I've done 7 turns and that's without rescuing Ike (read: he had a chance to build a fair amount with Mia). Then 3-1 to get them to C. Even if you take 3-2, 3-3, 3-4 combined to get Mia and Ike their B (they get 45 points from chapter bonuses alone, so don't tell me you can't scrape up 4 points in 3 chapters), 3-5 + 3-7 should make an easy A since you can't shorten 3-7 by even a single turn. Only need 19 points in 3-7 even if you got none in 3-5. 7 adjacents in a 12 turn map in which it incredibly easy to manage to get Ike to encounter the BK. Or 6 adjacents and 1 shove, if you like.

(and how did you get 10 adjacents? 10 x 3 = 30. You never need to get 30 when you only need to reach 50 or 49 and you get 15 at a time from being in the same chapter. 10 adjacents in two chapters is worth 60 points. Who needs that much? The correct number is 7, or 6 + 1 if you want to involve a turn where Ike shoves Mia for whatever reason.)

You're right, I added up wrong. 7 adjacents is pretty realistic even if all they have is 3-7 to build it in.

Buy the end of turn 1, you've got the 2 extra brave weapon guys. These have 51 hp and 31 def. That's 12 out of 32 that can't be KOd by Titania, and who knows how many of the 20 got a lucky def or hp proc and can't be killed either. Now, 8 of those guys are probably on the tiles in the two corners, but that still leaves 4 more.

Well, if she really needs to, Titania can use the Hammer if there are any uses left. And while some of the 20 will proc extra def/hp,

There we go. So Titania is not supporting Ike.

I think it depends on how her speed ends up.

[Interceptor]

Anouleth, the bottom line about transfers is that we can't rank them "realistically" without undermining the integrity of the rest of the list, because including more than one transfer unit in an army means that we're using different criteria for ranking than what is used for the normal units. A tier list can't do this without collapsing into a black hole, as it creates the possibility of circular arguments that can't be resolved, such as a situation where A is objectively better than B, and B is better than C, but C is better than A.

The current solution is the best one that has been proposed for a monolithic tier list. Unless you have something better that you've been sitting on, the only way to implement what you want to do is with a wholly different list.

[Narga_Rocks]

My point isn't that transfer units should be rated relative to a team of transfer units. Only that it should be acknowledged that for a transfer unit, there will be more resources available because the rest of the team doesn't need them so badly.

Sucks to be Boyd(T). Better to screw one guy over than screw over the rest of the list.

Because Titania (N), by definition, does not have a transfer. If I claim Oscar (T) > Titania (N), you cannot then claim that we can give Titania transfers because that's an different argument and not the original point.

But you can't compare them directly. Titania(N)'s competition is completely different than Oscar(T)'s. Titania is on a team of Ns, and is quite a lot better than the majority of them. Thus, she gets ahead of guys like Nolan. Oscar(T), on the other hand, will not be among the top if you put him on a team of other T units. Why should he be > Nolan if he's like 6th best or whatever? Hardly seems logical. So now you'd get the circular thing that Interceptor is talking about:

Oscar(T) > Titania (N) > Nolan > Oscar(T).

Do you not see this as a problem? Or are you disputing the idea that Nolan > Oscar(T) when Oscar(T) is so very far from the best unit on his squad and Nolan is frequently top3, sometimes top2, and top 4 or 5 or whatever for late part 1.

Even if you want to suggest that Oscar(T) is statistically better than Titania(N) that's not the end of things. There's also what they are responsible for doing on their team. Oscar(T) could have a bundle of other (T) units that make him redundant. But Titania(N) is, what, 3rd best on the team of Ns? Maybe even 2nd best in a couple of chapters over Ike(N). How does that translate to Oscar(T) > Titania(N)?

Perhaps the best solution is just to create an entirely separate tier list for transfer units, just as in other FEs, we have separate tier lists for different routes. Drastic, yes, but better two have two accurate tier lists then a tier list in a weird quantum state of accurate and inaccurate depending on what units are transferred.

Have at it. I will keep the transfer units in a void on this tier list since it is the best way to rate them, and you can make another topic with a transfer unit tier list so that I can happily ignore this whole bad idea.

And how guaranteed is it? When we use average stats, we know that the numbers we throw around are likely to be the case in the real game. But the chance of Mia getting +strength from a BEXP level up could be anywhere between 45% and 100%, because we don't know how BEXP works (I think my impression is correct, but it could be wrong).

Fair enough.

See, that's the thing. Between the card and the (unknown) chance of 21 str from bexp I'd say there is a similar chance of Mia getting 36 atk as there is any of the other units getting whatever we suggest from averages.

I guess, but even against Generals, most units can double. 34 attack and about 21AS is pretty realistic for a handful of units like Boyd/Brom/Rolf. I wouldn't have Oscar on the north-hand side of the map anyway. Maybe Nephenee, but she can double so she doesn't need quite so much attack. I guess it lets her avoid a counter sometimes.

See, I'd rather Oscar not face the counter. Gatrie couldn't care less, obviously, but Oscar/Boyd/Neph will care a fair amount. Oscar stops caring as much around the time he gets a B support, but I'm only talking about 3-2 anyway.

I think it depends on how her speed ends up.

What? You have to build the Ike support at the beginning. How are you going to know if she's going to get lucky with her spd procs in tier 3 when you are sitting there in 3-2 saying "hmm, I wonder who should support Ike". Tell me you aren't suggesting that Ike reverts to a C support with Titania if Titania happens to get some lucky spd ups after she promotes in 3-8 or whenever.

[Florete]

Perhaps the best solution is just to create an entirely separate tier list for transfer units, just as in other FEs, we have separate tier lists for different routes. Drastic, yes, but better two have two accurate tier lists then a tier list in a weird quantum state of accurate and inaccurate depending on what units are transferred.

No. The point of looking at transferred units in the first place was to see the impact they have on the game and how much they improve over their non-transferred selves. Barring the fact that a fully transferred team may not even be possible anyway, a fully transferred tier list defeats the purpose of what we want to find out. Some transferred units might even end up lower on the new list compared to their other self simply because the rest of the team improves too much.

[Anouleth]

Sucks to be Boyd(T). Better to screw one guy over than screw over the rest of the list.

So you're saying that it's acceptable to have Boyd(T) in the wrong position for the sake of not having to rethink how we tier transfer units? It's not like Boyd (T) is the only person who is affected. Oscar (T) really wants a Crown, for instance, but with Gatrie, Shinon, Mia, and DB units all desperate for one as well, he might actually be worse off in terms of resources.

But you can't compare them directly. Titania(N)'s competition is completely different than Oscar(T)'s. Titania is on a team of Ns, and is quite a lot better than the majority of them. Thus, she gets ahead of guys like Nolan. Oscar(T), on the other hand, will not be among the top if you put him on a team of other T units. Why should he be > Nolan if he's like 6th best or whatever? Hardly seems logical. So now you'd get the circular thing that Interceptor is talking about:

Oscar(T) > Titania (N) > Nolan > Oscar(T).

Then we compare Oscar (T) and Titania (N) both relative to an (N) team when we compare them to Nolan. It just means that when we think about resource distribution, Oscar (T) is going to have to fight harder for a Crown than he would ordinarily. Since we are only interested in this tier list in how units perform relative to a (N) team, we should compare them that way, but that doesn't mean we should ignore the realities of how transfers affect resources.

Do you not see this as a problem? Or are you disputing the idea that Nolan > Oscar(T) when Oscar(T) is so very far from the best unit on his squad and Nolan is frequently top3, sometimes top2, and top 4 or 5 or whatever for late part 1.

I wouldn't be that generous with Nolan in late part 1.

Even if you want to suggest that Oscar(T) is statistically better than Titania(N) that's not the end of things. There's also what they are responsible for doing on their team. Oscar(T) could have a bundle of other (T) units that make him redundant. But Titania(N) is, what, 3rd best on the team of Ns? Maybe even 2nd best in a couple of chapters over Ike(N). How does that translate to Oscar(T) > Titania(N)?

Because from what you and RFoF have said, we're not interested in how Oscar (T) compares to transfer units, only in how he compares to non-transfer units.

No. The point of looking at transferred units in the first place was to see the impact they have on the game and how much they improve over their non-transferred selves. Barring the fact that a fully transferred team may not even be possible anyway, a fully transferred tier list defeats the purpose of what we want to find out. Some transferred units might even end up lower on the new list compared to their other self simply because the rest of the team improves too much.

Except that if we want to actually figure out how well characters improve over their regular variants, we need to take into account other things that will change between a regular run and a transferred run, like the increased availability of stat boosters. I don't think that Boyd (T), for instance, deserves a place only six places above his regular variant. I mean, even Mist only goes up 6 spaces with her transfers. I think that it's very reasonable to want to put it all on one tier list, and I agree that a tier list that combined both would be the most desirable thing.

Edited December 8, 2010 by Mr. Know-it-all-Anouleth

[Florete]

Except that if we want to actually figure out how well characters improve over their regular variants, we need to take into account other things that will change between a regular run and a transferred run, like the increased availability of stat boosters. I don't think that Boyd (T), for instance, deserves a place only six places above his regular variant. I mean, even Mist only goes up 6 spaces with her transfers. I think that it's very reasonable to want to put it all on one tier list, and I agree that a tier list that combined both would be the most desirable thing.

I can see Boyd(T) going up as well, but that's not the point. You can make an all-transfers list if you want, there's no problem with that as it is, I'm just saying that that's not what we were aiming for when we decided to put transferred units on the list. Trust me, there's a good reason we did it the way we did, and it was the result of much discussion. People have tried questioning it but no one came up with a better solution.

Also, don't compare Mist to Boyd like that. It all depends on the characters above and below them how much they move. The characters above Boyd could simply be much more clearly better than him than the characters above Mist, for example. 6 spaces is not exactly an equivalent change for two different units in different areas of the list (and I believe there were arguments to drop Mist(T) anyway).

[Anouleth]

I can see Boyd(T) going up as well, but that's not the point. You can make an all-transfers list if you want, there's no problem with that as it is, I'm just saying that that's not what we were aiming for when we decided to put transferred units on the list. Trust me, there's a good reason we did it the way we did, and it was the result of much discussion. People have tried questioning it but no one came up with a better solution

I don't really want to make an all-transfers list (laziness, plus I don't think it would get any activity). I understand the reasoning behind it... but if it contradicts what actually happens in game, the reasoning must be faulty somewhere, and to be honest, I don't see why we can't take into account how resources work in transfer play and tier transfer characters relative to non-transfer characters at the same time.

Also, don't compare Mist to Boyd like that. It all depends on the characters above and below them how much they move. The characters above Boyd could simply be much more clearly better than him than the characters above Mist, for example. 6 spaces is not exactly an equivalent change for two different units in different areas of the list (and I believe there were arguments to drop Mist(T) anyway).

I think that Boyd (T) could go above Nephenee, actually. Look at 3-2, for example. Boyd is probably sitting at around 25 strength, 21 speed with Axes and a C support. Nephenee has maybe 17 strength, lances, 24AS and a C support with Brom, who himself really sucks. In terms of durability, Boyd wins (Boyd has about 52HP/16DEF, Nephenee has 35HP/17DEF). So Boyd is just creaming Nephenee in terms of attack, and he's still fast enough to double most Paladins/Generals/Sages. The difference between their attack is so great, to the point that against some enemies that Boyd doesn't double, he still deals just as good damage as Nephenee even when they both pull out a forge. For example, Boyd with a Steel forge 2HKOes Dragonmasters while Nephenee needs a Steel forge to 4HKO.

And Boyd can extend this lead. He caps HP very early (level ~12), and can cap skill pretty quickly as well with a Secret Book. That leaves STR/SPD/DEF as his three highest growths. So not only can he start BEXPing earlier, he gets better results out of it. He might even cap speed in tier 2 which leaves him perfectly set up to tear apart Part 4.

Edited December 8, 2010 by Mr. Know-it-all-Anouleth

[Interceptor]

I understand the reasoning behind it... [...] to be honest, I don't see why we can't take into account how resources work in transfer play and tier transfer characters relative to non-transfer characters at the same time.

Clearly you do NOT understand it. The conflict should be self-evident to anyone that does grasp the logic. The moment that A's army has a different resource base or unit selection than B's army, we lose the ability to rank those two units relative to each other on this tier list. That's why we consider transfers in a void, so that the only difference between the two scenarios are the units themselves.

For example, Boyd with a Steel forge 2HKOes Dragonmasters while Nephenee needs a Steel forge just to 4HKO

This is where it's useful to note that Dragonmasters have 11-12 dodge to Nephenee's 31 crit from an uber-forge, giving her the ability to 1) kick reason to the curb, 2) make the impossible possible, and 3) have a bio-neutral ~36% chance to ORKO. Boyd can't match that even with a Bond support, because he can't double.

Edited December 8, 2010 by Interceptor

[Anouleth]

Clearly you do NOT understand it. The conflict should be self-evident to anyone that does grasp the logic. The moment that A's army has a different resource base or unit selection than B's army, we lose the ability to rank those two units relative to each other on this tier list. That's why we consider transfers in a void, so that the only difference between the two scenarios are the units themselves.

Why? Are we supposed to stick our fingers in our ears and pretend that Oscar (T) can take a crown really easily even though that's patently not the case? I'm happy to concede that we compare the performance of all characters to (N) characters, but there is no reason we need to ignore reality to do so.

And of course we can compare a transfer character and a non-transfer character even with different resource distribution. Why couldn't we? Almost the only difference is adjusting the amount of opportunity cost we apply to taking resources. Sure, it might seem inconsistent that Oscar (T) takes a higher opportunity cost for his Crown than Oscar (N), but that's just what we need to do in order to be accurate.

This is where it's useful to note that Dragonmasters have 11-12 dodge to Nephenee's 31 crit from an uber-forge, giving her the ability to 1) kick reason to the curb, 2) make the impossible possible, and 3) have a bio-neutral ~36% chance to ORKO. Boyd can't match that even with a Bond support, because he can't double.

What about Paladins and Generals and Sages, then? And what happens for Nephenee when Boyd gets his opportunity to use BEXP and catch up in speed? And what about Boyd's durability lead that will only expand over time as Boyd's defence growth kicks in? I cited the Dragonmaster to show that even in a case where she doubles and he doesn't, they still have comparable offense most of the time.

Plus, if Nephenee is continuously going to be using steel critforges to catch up to Boyd, then that's money that Boyd's team can spend on other things, like stat boosters. Two Steel critforges is about the same price as one steel axe 5mt forge and one Secret Book, so Boyd's stat booster for BEXP is effectively free.

Edited December 8, 2010 by Mr. Know-it-all-Anouleth

[nflchamp]

Why? Are we supposed to stick our fingers in our ears and pretend that Oscar (T) can take a crown really easily even though that's patently not the case? I'm happy to concede that we compare the performance of all characters to (N) characters, but there is no reason we need to ignore reality to do so.

And of course we can compare a transfer character and a non-transfer character even with different resource distribution. Why couldn't we? Almost the only difference is adjusting the amount of opportunity cost we apply to taking resources. Sure, it might seem inconsistent that Oscar (T) takes a higher opportunity cost for his Crown than Oscar (N), but that's just what we need to do in order to be accurate.

The second you start saying that Oscar(T) has more competition for x resource because of the existence of other transfers you must accept the existence of other transfers, at least for resource distribution. This will, again, lead right back to the problem of 'Who the hell gets transfers and who doesn't?'

Then you're just leaving the door open for the 'If we can count multiple transfers during resource distribution, why can't we do so during the actual chapters?' argument. That'll be a load of fun.

[Interceptor]

And of course we can compare a transfer character and a non-transfer character even with different resource distribution.

Bolded is why you keep missing the point. This isn't about resource distribution, it's about availability of resources period. The whole concept behind the tier list is that we can measure a unit's value relative to another by comparing one unit's "army" to the other's. There is no difference between the two armies other than the two units in question, so any difference in performance is more or less directly attributable to the presence/absence of those two units.

If you include transfer units, you blow this whole paradigm out of the water. Comparing Oscar(T) to Nephenee(N) turns into nonsense, because Oscar can have people like Titania(T) in his army, but Nephenee can't. We're not measuring Titania(T)'s performance in this comparison, but she's undeniably changing the performance of Oscar(T)'s army in a way that she doesn't in Nephenee's (because she doesn't exist there). This kicks the legs out from underneath all of our comparisons up to this point, because much of the increased power in Oscar's army has nothing to do with Oscar at all.

What about Paladins and Generals and Sages, then? And what happens for Nephenee when Boyd gets his opportunity to use BEXP and catch up in speed? And what about Boyd's durability lead that will only expand over time as Boyd's defence growth kicks in? I cited the Dragonmaster to show that even in a case where she doubles and he doesn't, they still have comparable offense most of the time.

Nephenee is going to be stuffing Paladins with the Horseslayer, and she already ORKOs Sages with almost anything. We can give Boyd the Generals because of Hammertime. So?

Nephenee is smokeshowing Boyd in SPD, and she even levels faster than he does. I don't even know what this means.

Plus, if Nephenee is continuously going to be using steel critforges to catch up to Boyd, then that's money that Boyd's team can spend on other things, like stat boosters. Two Steel critforges is about the same price as one steel axe 5mt forge and one Secret Book, so Boyd's stat booster for BEXP is effectively free.

Nephenee's team can also buy those stat boosters, because the GMs have so much money that Uncle Shinon can light Cuban cigars with $100 bills. Your argument only makes sense if gold is a scarce resource; it is not.

[Anouleth]

Bolded is why you keep missing the point. This isn't about resource distribution, it's about availability of resources period. The whole concept behind the tier list is that we can measure a unit's value relative to another by comparing one unit's "army" to the other's. There is no difference between the two armies other than the two units in question, so any difference in performance is more or less directly attributable to the presence/absence of those two units.

The exact same resources exist for Oscar (T) and Oscar (N), it is just that they have different opportunity costs. There's technically nothing stopping Titania (T) from going ahead and using the wing anyway, it's just not very important - thus, the Wing has less opportunity cost for Boyd.

And how exactly is comparing two 'armies' going to work? Sure, Oscar (T)'s army is better than Oscar (N)'s army, but how the hell is that supposed to work when we talk about Nolan? Are you going to compare the GMs and the Dawn Brigade?

If you include transfer units, you blow this whole paradigm out of the water. Comparing Oscar(T) to Nephenee(N) turns into nonsense, because Oscar can have people like Titania(T) in his army, but Nephenee can't. We're not measuring Titania(T)'s performance in this comparison, but she's undeniably changing the performance of Oscar(T)'s army in a way that she doesn't in Nephenee's (because she doesn't exist there). This kicks the legs out from underneath all of our comparisons up to this point, because much of the increased power in Oscar's army has nothing to do with Oscar at all.

Who cares about the increased power of Oscar's army? If we want to know how Oscar (T) performs in comparison to Nephenee (N), we figure out the best way to use Oscar (T), evaluate his performance, penalise him the opportunity cost of any resources he took, then compare the two. Like with most characters. Of course, it gets more difficult when we have compare him to someone like Nolan, because traditionally we compare two people on two different teams by seeing who performs better relative to the other people on their teams. But since we can compare Oscar to other (N) characters on his team like I mentioned above, we can figure out how Oscar performs in relative terms. In this way, the tier list can be completely coherent (no Oscar>Nolan>Gatrie>Oscar or anything silly), solve the issue of not tiering units that need resources accurately, and still tier units relative to (N) characters rather than (T) characters.

Nephenee is going to be stuffing Paladins with the Horseslayer, and she already ORKOs Sages with almost anything. We can give Boyd the Generals because of Hammertime. So?

I could put the Horseslayer in the hands of literally anyone with lance rank and have a unit that ORKOs. Gatrie and Haar actually kill in one hit (maybe Oscar too). Nephenee is taking the Horseslayer just so that she can match Boyd's performance. Hell, since Boyd can ORKO them with a Short Axe, she doesn't even match him, since he won't take counters and can take out the Bow Paladins on enemy phase.

Boyd is more accurate about 1-rounding Sages since Nephenee needs to use the Short Spear.

Why do we need to give Boyd the Hammer for generals? I think you underestimate just how great Boyd's strength is, since he actually borderline ORKOes the weaker ones with a forge. Like, he needs either an extra point of strength or a coin on his forge to make up the difference.

Nephenee is smokeshowing Boyd in SPD, and she even levels faster than he does. I don't even know what this means.

It means that as soon as Boyd starts doubling, he is far, far superior to Nephenee. For instance, compare a third tier Boyd to a third tier Nephenee. Same speed, similar defense, but Boyd crushes her in HP and strength, with Axe access and a better affinity too. Plus, Boyd can not only start BEXPing earlier, but he doesn't take as long to cap the important stat (speed). So while a level 12 Boyd needs to gain 5 points of speed in order to cap, a level 10 Nephenee in the same chapter can't even start BEXPing for a short while. So Boyd is probably going to promote a chapter or two earlier than her.

[Florete]

Who cares about the increased power of Oscar's army?

How can you seriously ask a question like this in a tier list topic? The whole idea behind a tier list is how units compare to the others on their team.

[Anouleth]

How can you seriously ask a question like this in a tier list topic? The whole idea behind a tier list is how units compare to the others on their team.

I can see Boyd(T) going up as well, but that's not the point. You can make an all-transfers list if you want, there's no problem with that as it is, I'm just saying that that's not what we were aiming for when we decided to put transferred units on the list. Trust me, there's a good reason we did it the way we did, and it was the result of much discussion. People have tried questioning it but no one came up with a better solution.

You don't want to compare (T) units to other (T) units. So obviously, the solution is to not do it and compare them to (N) units - which is EXACTLY what the current list does and something I have no problem with now.

[Narga_Rocks]

You don't want to compare (T) units to other (T) units. So obviously, the solution is to not do it and compare them to (N) units - which is EXACTLY what the current list does and something I have no problem with now.

You just want to make the method of judging them inconsistent. You want to have the other transfer units exist for the sake of one part of a character's existence (determining resources) but not for another part of their existence (how good they are compared to the rest of the team). And you don't even see a problem with this.

[Anouleth]

You just want to make the method of judging them inconsistent. You want to have the other transfer units exist for the sake of one part of a character's existence (determining resources) but not for another part of their existence (how good they are compared to the rest of the team). And you don't even see a problem with this.

Because pretending that transfer units work in a vacuum and aren't affected by other transfers at all is perfectly acceptable when it directly contradicts reality? The reality is that transfer units are on a transfer team and their performance is affected by this - not their 'performance relative to the rest of the team', but their 'performance relative to the enemies'. And if we want to compare a transfer unit on a transfer team directly to someone on a non-transfer team, then we can because they fight the same enemies in the same chapters.

And I think that this will lead to a more accurate tier list in any case.